Download PDF
J Am Acad Audiol 2000; 11(10): 570-574
DOI: 10.1055/s-0042-1748202
Original Article

Effect of Interstimulus Interval on Subjective Categorical Loudness Judgments

Melissa N. Ruscetta
Department of Communication Science and Disorders, University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania
,
Catherine V. Palmer
Department of Communication Science and Disorders, University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania
Department of Otolaryngology, University of Pittsburgh Medical Center, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania
› Author Affiliations
› Further Information
Also available at
  PDF Download  Permissions and Reprints

Abstract

The Independent Hearing Aid Fitting Forum uses the visual input/output locator algorithm and the Contour Test of Loudness Perception to achieve the goal of restoring normal loudness perception with amplification. This method presupposes that subjective categorical loudness judgments are valid and reliable when using the procedure outlined by the test developers. There is no indication in the instructions of the Contour Test of a specific duration for interstimulus interval (ISI). The effect of ISI on loudness perception is important to establish because of potential time-error effects. Time-error refers to the extent to which the judged magnitude of a second stimulus varies with the time interval by which it follows the first stimulus. Past research has indicated that judgments of a second stimulus are shifted in the direction of the intensity of the preceding stimulus and that this effect intensifies with shorter ISIs. The current experiment was designed to examine whether a change in ISI produced a change in the loudness rating of the subsequent stimulus for subjective categorical loudness judgment testing. A trend toward lower, median dB values for ratings 2 to 5 at 500 Hz in a group of subjects with normal hearing was noted when 1–sec intervals were used in comparison with longer ISIs. No trends for the effect of ISI were noted at 3000 Hz. The findings provide ISI recommendations for loudness judgment test administration.

Abbreviations: DAT = digital audiotape, IHAFF = Independent Hearing Aid Fitting Forum, ISI = interstimulus interval, KEMAR = Knowles Electronics' Mannikin for Auditory Research, VIOLA = visual input/output locator algorithm, WDRC = wide dynamic range compression

Key Words

Contour Test of Loudness Perception - interstimulus interval - subjective categorical loudness judgments


Publication History

Article published online:
20 April 2022

© 2000. American Academy of Audiology. This article is published by Thieme.

Thieme Medical Publishers, Inc.
333 Seventh Avenue, 18th Floor, New York, NY 10001, USA

 

  • REFERENCES

  • Allen JB, Hall JL, Jeng PS. (1990). Loudness growth in 1/2 octave bands (LGOB): a procedure for the assessment of loudness. J Acoust Soc Am 88:745–753.
  • American National Standards Institute. (1969). American National Standard for Audiometry. (ANSI S3.6–1969). New York: ANSI.
  • American National Standards Institute. (1989). American National Standard Specifications for Audiometers. (ANSI S3.6–1989). New York: ANSI.
  • Cox RM. (1995). Using loudness data for hearing aid selection: the IHAFF approach. Hear J 48:10, 44.
  • Cox RM. (1999). Five years later: an update on the IHAFF fitting protocol. Hear J 52:10–18.
  • Cox RM, Alexander GC, Taylor IM, Gray GA. (1997). The Contour Test of Loudness Perception. Ear Hear 18:388–400.
  • Elmasian R, Galambos R. (1975). Loudness enhancement: monaural, binaural, and dichotic. J Acoust Soc Am 58:229–234.
  • Elmasian R, Galambos R, Bernheim A. (1980). Loudness enhancement and decrement in four paradigms. J Acoust Soc Am 67:601–607.
  • Florentine M. (1986). Level discrimination of tones as a function of duration. J Acoust Soc Am 79:792–797.
  • Hawkins DB, Walden BE, Montgomery AA, Prosek RA. (1987). Description and validation of an LDL procedure designed to select SSPL90. Ear Hear 8:162–169.
  • Hellbruck J, Thomamuller D, Zeitler A. (1995). Hearing field audiometry with groups of normal hearing persons in natural sound fields. Audiol Akustik 34:60–81.
  • Henning GB. (1970). Acomparison of the effects of signal duration on frequency and amplitude discrimination. In: Plomp R, Smoorenburg GF, eds. Frequency Analysis and Periodicity Detection in Hearing. Sitjthoff, Leiden, The Netherlands.
  • Jesteadt W, Luce RD, Green DM. (1977). Sequential effects in judgment of loudness. J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform 3:92–104.
  • Needham JG. (1934). The time-error as a function of continued experimentation. Am J Psychol 46:558–567.
  • Palmer CV, Lindley GA. (1998). Reliability of the Contour Test in a population of adults with hearing loss. J Am Acad Audiol 9:209–215.
  • Postman L. (1946). The time-error in auditory perception. Am J Psychol 56:193–219.
  • Ricketts TA, Bentier RA. (1996). The effect of test signal type and bandwidth on the categorical scaling of loudness. J Acoust Soc Am 99:2281–2287.
  • Robinson K, Gatehouse S. (1996). Testetest reliability of loudness scaling. Ear Hear 17:120–123.
  • Ventry IM, Johnson JI. (1978). Evaluation of a clinical method for measuring comfortable loudness for speech. J Speech Hear Disord 43:149–159.
  • Ward LM, Lockhead GR. (1970). Sequential effects and memory in category judgment. J Exp Psychol 84:27–34.
  • Wier C. (1980). Pure-tone intensity discrimination as a function of frequency, level and duration. J Acoust Soc Am 67(Suppl 1):S22.
  • Woods RW, Ventry IM, Gatling LW. (1973). Effect of ascending and descending measurement methods on comfortable loudness levels for pure tones. J Acoust Soc Am 54:205–206.
  • Woodworth RS, Schlosberg H. (1954). Experimental Psychology. Rev Ed. New York: Holt, Rinehart, and Winston.